Democrats Hate Amy Coney Barrett Because They Hate the Constitution

[daveman]

So what's the problem?

The problem is that your pick here says "Screw prior law. I can just do whatever I want".

For example, it was established law that parental consent laws for abortion are constitutional, as long as a parently bypass exists for abuse cases. Your hero decided entirely on her own to screw that, the parental bypass wasn't necessary. Rank judicial activism on her part.

It was established law that the right to abortion was not related to the circumstances of pregnancy. Barret decided that this wan't the case, based on absolutely nothing, and that the state had to investigage _why_ to make sure the abortion wasn't for a reason she didn't like. More brazen judicial activism.

But hey, let's go with originalism. Abortion was legal and common when the Constitution was written. The founders were plainly fine with it. That's their original intent, to have legal abortion. So you agree with that, right?

Oh wait, you don't. You don't give a shit about the founders' intent. You're lying to everyone's face about that, and everyone knows it. You just want to force your sicko perv control freak beliefs on to every moral person.

You blood thirsty Dems and your fetish for killing babies in the womb wow.

Leftism is a death cult.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

So what's the problem?

The problem is that your pick here says "Screw prior law. I can just do whatever I want".

For example, it was established law that parental consent laws for abortion are constitutional, as long as a parently bypass exists for abuse cases. Your hero decided entirely on her own to screw that, the parental bypass wasn't necessary. Rank judicial activism on her part.

It was established law that the right to abortion was not related to the circumstances of pregnancy. Barret decided that this wan't the case, based on absolutely nothing, and that the state had to investigage _why_ to make sure the abortion wasn't for a reason she didn't like. More brazen judicial activism.

But hey, let's go with originalism. Abortion was legal and common when the Constitution was written. The founders were plainly fine with it. That's their original intent, to have legal abortion. So you agree with that, right?

Oh wait, you don't. You don't give a shit about the founders' intent. You're lying to everyone's face about that, and everyone knows it. You just want to force your sicko perv control freak beliefs on to every moral person.

You blood thirsty Dems and your fetish for killing babies in the womb wow.

Leftism is a death cult.

Yes.

This is motherfucker Ted Kennedy literally screaming at Alito that the "gains of the last 50 years have to be protected."

The next time I am in the area, I'll be pissing on his grave.

This is the kind of bullshit that shows the left does not understand separation of powers.

 

[daveman]

So what's the problem?

The problem is that your pick here says "Screw prior law. I can just do whatever I want".

For example, it was established law that parental consent laws for abortion are constitutional, as long as a parently bypass exists for abuse cases. Your hero decided entirely on her own to screw that, the parental bypass wasn't necessary. Rank judicial activism on her part.

It was established law that the right to abortion was not related to the circumstances of pregnancy. Barret decided that this wan't the case, based on absolutely nothing, and that the state had to investigage _why_ to make sure the abortion wasn't for a reason she didn't like. More brazen judicial activism.

But hey, let's go with originalism. Abortion was legal and common when the Constitution was written. The founders were plainly fine with it. That's their original intent, to have legal abortion. So you agree with that, right?

Oh wait, you don't. You don't give a shit about the founders' intent. You're lying to everyone's face about that, and everyone knows it. You just want to force your sicko perv control freak beliefs on to every moral person.

The Founders would never ever had been ok with abortion as law.

You know this so stop

I'm sure it's just coincidence that whatever the left wants, they claim the Founders would want, too.

OMG YOU GUYS THE FOUNDING FATHERS WOULD TOTALLY HAVE WANTED AN ALL-POWERFUL FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

 

[daveman]

Democrats Hate Amy Coney Barrett Because They Hate the Constitution

townhall.com

If we look at the current positions of the modern Democratic Party, it is clear that they do not share Amy Coney Barrett’s originalist point of view. In fact, their current rhetoric demonstrates that they are far beyond merely despising the philosophy of originalism. Instead, they are actively working to radically and fundamentally transform the Constitution into an unrecognizable monstrosity.

As has already been pointed out, by Turley...this is the case.

They keep pushing the idea that justices can't rule to reverse "progress" and that they have to rule the way the senate wants them to vote.

The democrats seem to have lost all sense of the purpose of the court.

Article VI of the US Constitution says that no religious test shall be used for government employees in the USA. When the fucking Democrat Senators ask her about her religion, they are violating the Constitution.

They know that.

You know that.

But that does not stop them.

If I thought she was using religion as a basis for her decisions, I would not want her in there.

But I do know that...no matter what the issue is....the dyke patrol (Kagen Sotomeyer, Ginsburg) would vote lockstep towards the left.

Intellectual shit-for-brains.

Sotomayor said several times before she was confirmed that she would base decisions on her gender and her ethnicity, not on the law.

"Wise Latina", anyone?

 

[daveman]

So what's the problem?

The problem is that your pick here says "Screw prior law. I can just do whatever I want".

For example, it was established law that parental consent laws for abortion are constitutional, as long as a parently bypass exists for abuse cases. Your hero decided entirely on her own to screw that, the parental bypass wasn't necessary. Rank judicial activism on her part.

It was established law that the right to abortion was not related to the circumstances of pregnancy. Barret decided that this wan't the case, based on absolutely nothing, and that the state had to investigage _why_ to make sure the abortion wasn't for a reason she didn't like. More brazen judicial activism.

But hey, let's go with originalism. Abortion was legal and common when the Constitution was written. The founders were plainly fine with it. That's their original intent, to have legal abortion. So you agree with that, right?

Oh wait, you don't. You don't give a shit about the founders' intent. You're lying to everyone's face about that, and everyone knows it. You just want to force your sicko perv control freak beliefs on to every moral person.

You blood thirsty Dems and your fetish for killing babies in the womb wow.

Leftism is a death cult.

Yes.

This is motherfucker Ted Kennedy literally screaming at Alito that the "gains of the last 50 years have to be protected."

The next time I am in the area, I'll be pissing on his grave.

This is the kind of bullshit that shows the left does not understand separation of powers.

There is no place in leftist totalitarianism for the separation of powers.

 

[BluesLegend]

So what's the problem?

The problem is that your pick here says "Screw prior law. I can just do whatever I want".

For example, it was established law that parental consent laws for abortion are constitutional, as long as a parently bypass exists for abuse cases. Your hero decided entirely on her own to screw that, the parental bypass wasn't necessary. Rank judicial activism on her part.

It was established law that the right to abortion was not related to the circumstances of pregnancy. Barret decided that this wan't the case, based on absolutely nothing, and that the state had to investigage _why_ to make sure the abortion wasn't for a reason she didn't like. More brazen judicial activism.

But hey, let's go with originalism. Abortion was legal and common when the Constitution was written. The founders were plainly fine with it. That's their original intent, to have legal abortion. So you agree with that, right?

Oh wait, you don't. You don't give a shit about the founders' intent. You're lying to everyone's face about that, and everyone knows it. You just want to force your sicko perv control freak beliefs on to every moral person.

You blood thirsty Dems and your fetish for killing babies in the womb wow.

Leftism is a death cult.

Yes.

This is motherfucker Ted Kennedy literally screaming at Alito that the "gains of the last 50 years have to be protected."

The next time I am in the area, I'll be pissing on his grave.

This is the kind of bullshit that shows the left does not understand separation of powers.

There is no place in leftist totalitarianism for the separation of powers.

^^^ nailed it! Look at Dem state and federal legislation, it's all based on threats and punishment. OBEY or be fined and punished financially for refusing to obey.

 

[Blackrook]

So what's the problem?

The problem is that your pick here says "Screw prior law. I can just do whatever I want".

For example, it was established law that parental consent laws for abortion are constitutional, as long as a parently bypass exists for abuse cases. Your hero decided entirely on her own to screw that, the parental bypass wasn't necessary. Rank judicial activism on her part.

It was established law that the right to abortion was not related to the circumstances of pregnancy. Barret decided that this wan't the case, based on absolutely nothing, and that the state had to investigage _why_ to make sure the abortion wasn't for a reason she didn't like. More brazen judicial activism.

But hey, let's go with originalism. Abortion was legal and common when the Constitution was written. The founders were plainly fine with it. That's their original intent, to have legal abortion. So you agree with that, right?

Oh wait, you don't. You don't give a shit about the founders' intent. You're lying to everyone's face about that, and everyone knows it. You just want to force your sicko perv control freak beliefs on to every moral person.

The Founders would never ever had been ok with abortion as law.

You know this so stop

Liberals have ruined this country with all their laws the Founding Fathers wisely never put in place. They ruined America by passing civil rights bill for blacks, they ruined the country by giving women (influenced by their hormones) the right to vote, they've ruined America by letting non-Christians immigrate into our country. Hopefully voters keep that in mind on election day.

Republicans are responsible for giving voting rights to blacks and women. Democrats were against these reforms.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

So what's the problem?

The problem is that your pick here says "Screw prior law. I can just do whatever I want".

For example, it was established law that parental consent laws for abortion are constitutional, as long as a parently bypass exists for abuse cases. Your hero decided entirely on her own to screw that, the parental bypass wasn't necessary. Rank judicial activism on her part.

It was established law that the right to abortion was not related to the circumstances of pregnancy. Barret decided that this wan't the case, based on absolutely nothing, and that the state had to investigage _why_ to make sure the abortion wasn't for a reason she didn't like. More brazen judicial activism.

But hey, let's go with originalism. Abortion was legal and common when the Constitution was written. The founders were plainly fine with it. That's their original intent, to have legal abortion. So you agree with that, right?

Oh wait, you don't. You don't give a shit about the founders' intent. You're lying to everyone's face about that, and everyone knows it. You just want to force your sicko perv control freak beliefs on to every moral person.

The Founders would never ever had been ok with abortion as law.

You know this so stop

I'm sure it's just coincidence that whatever the left wants, they claim the Founders would want, too.

OMG YOU GUYS THE FOUNDING FATHERS WOULD TOTALLY HAVE WANTED AN ALL-POWERFUL FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

Which is totally unspupported.

Look at where we came from...the Articles of Confderation.

The Federalist Papers were a sales tool to get people to accept the new consitution over fears it would reach to far.

 

[daveman]

So what's the problem?

The problem is that your pick here says "Screw prior law. I can just do whatever I want".

For example, it was established law that parental consent laws for abortion are constitutional, as long as a parently bypass exists for abuse cases. Your hero decided entirely on her own to screw that, the parental bypass wasn't necessary. Rank judicial activism on her part.

It was established law that the right to abortion was not related to the circumstances of pregnancy. Barret decided that this wan't the case, based on absolutely nothing, and that the state had to investigage _why_ to make sure the abortion wasn't for a reason she didn't like. More brazen judicial activism.

But hey, let's go with originalism. Abortion was legal and common when the Constitution was written. The founders were plainly fine with it. That's their original intent, to have legal abortion. So you agree with that, right?

Oh wait, you don't. You don't give a shit about the founders' intent. You're lying to everyone's face about that, and everyone knows it. You just want to force your sicko perv control freak beliefs on to every moral person.

The Founders would never ever had been ok with abortion as law.

You know this so stop

I'm sure it's just coincidence that whatever the left wants, they claim the Founders would want, too.

OMG YOU GUYS THE FOUNDING FATHERS WOULD TOTALLY HAVE WANTED AN ALL-POWERFUL FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

Which is totally unspupported.

Look at where we came from...the Articles of Confderation.

The Federalist Papers were a sales tool to get people to accept the new consitution over fears it would reach to far.

That's history, and leftists hate history -- because it doesn't support their claims. That's why they're always trying to rewrite it.

 

[mamooth]

"Are you saying it shouldn't live and breath once you get your way?"

Nice retreat, squealer. You didn't even try to defend your dishonest judicial activist hero.

And as always, you're quite the violent little triggered cultist. But that's not the issue. Well, not directly. I suppose your violent nature is tied in with your fascist gutless authoritarian-follower nature.

Again, it's the fascism, stupid. That's why people are disgusted by you. Even you can understand that, so stop playing dumb. Be proud of your fascist nature. At least honest fascists have honesty going for them.

Now, run along. You're needed. Your fascist leaders want another coat of saliva applied, and that's why they keep you around.

 

[basquebromance]

Ginsburg must be very angry up in heaven that everything she did will be reversed by her replacement

i've been reading Barrett's law review articles. she's a constitutionalist. that upsets me and it should upset Ginsburg up in heaven

 

[lennypartiv]

How will liberals react when Amy Coney Barrett ends legal abortion?

 

[Borillar]

Democrats Hate Amy Coney Barrett Because They Hate the Constitution

townhall.com

If we look at the current positions of the modern Democratic Party, it is clear that they do not share Amy Coney Barrett’s originalist point of view. In fact, their current rhetoric demonstrates that they are far beyond merely despising the philosophy of originalism. Instead, they are actively working to radically and fundamentally transform the Constitution into an unrecognizable monstrosity.

As has already been pointed out, by Turley...this is the case.

They keep pushing the idea that justices can't rule to reverse "progress" and that they have to rule the way the senate wants them to vote.

The democrats seem to have lost all sense of the purpose of the court.

The founders original intent was for rich white landowners to have the vote. Blacks were slaves and women were chattel. If not for liberal amendments to the constitution, Mrs Barrett would be at home baking cookies rather than sitting in judgement of men.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Democrats Hate Amy Coney Barrett Because They Hate the Constitution

townhall.com

If we look at the current positions of the modern Democratic Party, it is clear that they do not share Amy Coney Barrett’s originalist point of view. In fact, their current rhetoric demonstrates that they are far beyond merely despising the philosophy of originalism. Instead, they are actively working to radically and fundamentally transform the Constitution into an unrecognizable monstrosity.

As has already been pointed out, by Turley...this is the case.

They keep pushing the idea that justices can't rule to reverse "progress" and that they have to rule the way the senate wants them to vote.

The democrats seem to have lost all sense of the purpose of the court.

The founders original intent was for rich white landowners to have the vote. Blacks were slaves and women were chattel. If not for liberal amendments to the constitution, Mrs Barrett would be at home baking cookies rather than sitting in judgement of men.

That says nothing about the intent of the court.

So when you want to address the issue, I am all ears.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

How will liberals react when Amy Coney Barrett ends legal abortion?

She won't.

If Roe goes....most states will make it legal. Which is where the decisions should be made.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

"Are you saying it shouldn't live and breath once you get your way?"

Nice retreat, squealer. You didn't even try to defend your dishonest judicial activist hero.

And as always, you're quite the violent little triggered cultist. But that's not the issue. Well, not directly. I suppose your violent nature is tied in with your fascist gutless authoritarian-follower nature.

Again, it's the fascism, stupid. That's why people are disgusted by you. Even you can understand that, so stop playing dumb. Be proud of your fascist nature. At least honest fascists have honesty going for them.

Now, run along. You're needed. Your fascist leaders want another coat of saliva applied, and that's why they keep you around.

He does not need to defend her.

You've not shown she's an activist at all.

It is your inclination to act like an ass all the time. If not, you might get some coaching because it's pretty much all the time.

Barrett is going to be a great judge and you'll continue to be an internet nobody who lies their asses off or pretends to know something they don't.

 

[daveman]

"Are you saying it shouldn't live and breath once you get your way?"

Nice retreat, squealer. You didn't even try to defend your dishonest judicial activist hero.

And as always, you're quite the violent little triggered cultist. But that's not the issue. Well, not directly. I suppose your violent nature is tied in with your fascist gutless authoritarian-follower nature.

Again, it's the fascism, stupid. That's why people are disgusted by you. Even you can understand that, so stop playing dumb. Be proud of your fascist nature. At least honest fascists have honesty going for them.

Now, run along. You're needed. Your fascist leaders want another coat of saliva applied, and that's why they keep you around.

Oh, shaddap, you lying twat. You'd burn the Constitution if you could, and we both know it.

 

[daveman]

Democrats Hate Amy Coney Barrett Because They Hate the Constitution

townhall.com

If we look at the current positions of the modern Democratic Party, it is clear that they do not share Amy Coney Barrett’s originalist point of view. In fact, their current rhetoric demonstrates that they are far beyond merely despising the philosophy of originalism. Instead, they are actively working to radically and fundamentally transform the Constitution into an unrecognizable monstrosity.

As has already been pointed out, by Turley...this is the case.

They keep pushing the idea that justices can't rule to reverse "progress" and that they have to rule the way the senate wants them to vote.

The democrats seem to have lost all sense of the purpose of the court.

The founders original intent was for rich white landowners to have the vote. Blacks were slaves and women were chattel. If not for liberal amendments to the constitution, Mrs Barrett would be at home baking cookies rather than sitting in judgement of men.

Remember, kids, "Blacks were slaves and women were chattel" is bad when the Founding Fathers did it, but the left believes it's A-OK when the Muslim world does it.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

You should see the bullshit on the net regarding Barrett's confirmation.

The left is shitting itself green.

 

[K9Buck]

The Godless left hates anything that doesn't advance the cause of their spiritual father and the dark prince of this world, Satan.